Would you support this man's policies

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sydde, Jun 8, 2011.

?

Would You Vote for Rob McKenna?

  1. Oh Yes

    1 vote(s)
    7.1%
  2. I Think Not

    4 vote(s)
    28.6%
  3. Need More Information

    9 vote(s)
    64.3%
  1. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #1
    "Other-Washington" attorney general Rob McKenna is about to announce his bid to reside in the governor's mansion in Olympia. This man appears to be the definitive IDKW: he supports a major change in "sovereign immunity" (greatly reduced liability exposure) for the government and its contractors, and significant tightening of public disclosure laws ( CITE ). This from a man whose job involves protecting everyone. Would you support his policies?
     
  2. 184550, Jun 8, 2011
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011

    184550 Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #2
    I said 'Need More Information' because the OP is pretty vague and the link goes to a blog that doesn't do close to a remotely good job of breaking down the issues(s) mentioned. Or even providing additional information on the subject.
     
  3. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
  4. Sydde thread starter macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #4
    "I Don't Know What". Not really a Tea-Type, since his policies seem to favor the government, though that may only be their deflective hype. I resist using the "F" word because that just sounds too godwinian. He does come with an "R" after his name, FWIW, but that group seems so chaotic right now, defining them is problematic.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Can you just give us a bit more info? I'm curious.
     
  6. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #6
    Same here I'm not sure if I really understand whats going on here.
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    Me neither. I'd be happy to comment if I knew more.
     
  8. Simgar988 macrumors 65816

    Simgar988

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Location:
    UYBAATC
    #8
    I can't stop looking at OP's avatar. It's very... bothersome... For lack of a better word.

    (it's not bothering me per se, but it is annoyingly grabbing my attention)
     
  9. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #9
    I'm automatically suspicious of anyone who wants to tighten public disclosure laws since it's my view that sunshine is the best way to keep out the rot.
    I'm not sure about his change to put the legislature in charge of public worker contracts—if you can't trust government employees to write long-term contracts what makes a bunch of temporary vote-hustlers any better?

    He's also part of group trying to block health-care reform a maneuver I find incredibly problematic.

    So, probably not.
     
  10. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
  11. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #11
  12. sysiphus, Jun 8, 2011
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011

    sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #12
    As a Washingtonian registered as GOP but who hardly comes close to voting party line, he's absolutely got my vote. The Dems have had all the power in WA for decades now, and it's been a total mess. Queen Christine (Gregoire) turned a surplus into a massive deficit in record time (sound familiar?), and panders at all costs to the big unions and tribal casinos. I'm not of the opinion that unions are all bad etc, but she'll go and picket against Boeing for darn near anything--given that BA has got to be the best/biggest source of blue (as well as many white) collar jobs in the state, you'd think she'd think twice before biting the hand that feeds. (BA is hardly perfect, but in general is a great employer with great benefits for both the machinists and the engineers--plenty of both in my family/friends). I could go on for a while...but to sum up, consider the fiscal case against the GOP on the federal level in 2008, resize to fit the state level, and you've pretty much got the Dems in WA. From top to bottom, it's time for new leadership, and that includes the Governor's mansion.

    All this said, I don't think McKenna is perfect, but he's straight/moderate enough that he got a bigger percent of the vote than Obama did, in a solidly blue state. He easily carried King County (which has Seattle [votes liberal almost exclusively]) in his last election (he's currently state AG), which is solidly blue and generally votes along party lines--barring something really asinine, he should win easily. Any GOP candidate that can take King County is doing it wrong if he can't win, given that (low-population) Eastern WA is a lock for GOP votes.
     
  13. Sydde, Jun 9, 2011
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2011

    Sydde thread starter macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #13
    The Washington state Democratic party got their hands on "robmckennaforgovernor.com" and have lobbed not a few balls of mud, as it were, at him. Being a political thing, it really is hard to get unbiased or complete information on the man.

    He has made a significant and apparently somewhat effective effort to reduce methamphetamine problems in the state, and also been an advocate for victims of card and identity theft.

    On the other hand, there is that HCR lawsuit that he climbed onto, which I find troubling. There is the big thing about reducing the state's exposure to liability, which is really troubling. The issue is pretty complicated and addressing it should be done with great care. From what I can see, the problem appears to be that the immunity waiver is costing the state too much money, and I can understand that, some of the suits may indeed have been frivolous or over-reaching, but this looks a bit like putting money ahead of people.

    Washington has been a fairly blue state for quite a while. McKenna could just be the change the state needs — just like Scott Walker was the change Wisconsin needed :eek:
     
  14. sysiphus, Jun 9, 2011
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2011

    sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #14
    Sleazy move by the Dems, but not worth getting fussed over. Most people in WA know precisely what they're getting in McKenna, and by contrast, what to expect if Gregoire goes for term 3, or if Inslee tries to take her place. Painting McKenna as a radical Tea Party type just isn't going to work unless he deliberately bends his campaign that way--which I can't see him doing/working in WA. Again, he's moderate enough that very blue WA has elected and re-elected him as Attorney General. Point being, he's a known entity who, even if you don't like all of his policies, is a clean-cut moderate without the sleaze that comes with so many politicians. Scott Walker he is not, though the Dems would love for you to think otherwise--labeling him as such is their only chance to take him down.

    With regard to the issues, this election is going to be about the economy, the economy, and oh yes, the economy. You can take the HCR issue and pretty much split the state in two over it (East/West), but the main focus here is the economy. Gregoire won re-election last time because her opponent (Dino Rossi*) came off as a shallow sleazeball, but more importantly, she rode the "Blame the GOP/Bush/isn't Obama wonderful" train. Her economic platform the first time (she's on her second term)was pretending there wasn't a deficit by pushing the red ink out two months past election date--so that technically, there was no deficit (in the billions) until just after the election was over. Sadly, many people bought it. I have to think people are sick of the WA Dems' approach, however, as voter initiatives to require a state assembly 2/3rds majority to raise taxes, as well as shooting down a state income tax, easily passed last election cycle. (Everyone knew damn well that tax increases were her solution to solving the problem, if allowed...and the state pretty much universally gave her the finger on it)

    Washington has no excuse for being in fiscal trouble right now; between Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon, Russell, etc, there are plenty of big economic drivers here that are very healthy. (Yes, WaMu went down, but as the big players here go, it's an exception, not the rule). State spending has gone up over 30% under Gregoire; by now, she hasn't got an excuse (Bush is gone and the Dems have been in control here forever), and can't just push out the red ink/spending cuts another election cycle.

    McKenna could (IMHO) win on his own, but the Dems have all but spoon-fed this one; by now, everyone knows we're in an economic mess, and everyone knows who is to blame. He ought to win on the backlash alone.

    *Rossi, interestingly enough, beat Gregoire on the first and second counts of the 2004 election results...it took until the third recount (and with mysterious discoveries of uncounted ballots each time) until Gregoire finally won.


    EDIT: Also, that mudslinger site is laughable. For example, we're supposed to be worried that he supports Roe v. Wade as-is, despite not liking it on a personal level. (The irony is that this exact approach might work if the site were trying to appeal to the far-right crowd)... The horror, keeping your differing personal opinions separate from your professional evaluations!


    Sydde: you seem very ready to write him off as a radical, despite not appearing to know very much about him...or am I misinterpreting you? Also, I'd still love to get your reply to my question on this thread, if you've got a moment... :)
     

Share This Page